Om the previous study, at 3.7 for children and at 0.14 for adults

Om the previous study, at 3.7 for children and at 0.14 for adults [40]. The same estimates may reasonably apply to the alternative combination amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, as this was found as effective as ACT in the study area [42]. As far as safety is concerned, amodiaquine is the partner drug of one of the most widely used ACTs, and the combination, as well as sulfadoxinepyrimethamine alone, have been tested in several randomized controlled trials [42?5], while sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine has been extensively used as intermittent preventive MedChemExpress NT 157 treatment both in pregnancy and in infants, showing an excellent safety profile [46,47]. Harm expressed as mortality plus cost. If costs are considered, then all variables must be attributed a monetary value, including life (or the value of a death averted). Treatment harm will add to the cost of treatment for all (Tc), the attributed value to a life (Lc) lost because of treatment toxicity, while the harm caused by the untreated disease will involve the attributed value to a life lost due to disease mortality. By adding the new parameters, the following equation results: DT TczTmort ?Lc Dmort ?Lc ??Malaria Decision ThresholdFigure 4. maximal theoretical effect of tests: odds ratio. Legend: OR: log10odds ratio; LR: log10likelihood ratio. Log10positive and negative likelihood summed make the log10odds ratio, shown on a log10odds scale. The width AN 3199 between test-treatment threshold and decision threshold is determined by the negative likelihood ratio of the test. Mutatis mutandis, the distance between the test treatment and the decision threshold are given by the positive likelihood ratio. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058019.gFrom the same source as above [40], an average treatment cost of 1 J for children and 2 J for adults were obtained for ACT (arthemeter-lumefantrine), while the value of a death averted (for both adults and children) was made vary between J 525 and 3150 (corresponding to YLL values of 25 and 150 US , a proposed benchmark for a very cost-effective and a cost-effective health intervention, respectively) [2]. Costs are indicated in J as the local currency CFA has a fixed exchange rate with euro. The same conversion value with US as in the previous study [40] was maintained. The thresholds were then calculated with both the lower and the upper values. The estimated average adult cost of an alternative treatment with amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was of 0.14 J [48].The derivation of both formulas for test and test/treatment thresholds are provided in Methods S1.Test and Treatment DecisionsThe pre-test probability of malaria for a febrile patient of each age group and season, obtained from the same source, was then matched against the obtained test and test/treatment threshold. If the pre-test probability was below the test threshold, or above the test/treatment threshold, then the conclusion was that the test was not indicated.The Maximal Test CostThe “maximal test cost” is the test cost that virtually eliminates the test range, making the two thresholds coincide with the decision threshold. Any test cost equal or above the maximal test cost makes the test a non viable option. The formula and its derivation is provided in Methods S1.Estimate of the Test and Test/Treatment ThresholdEstimate based on the test accuracy. With the data previously obtained on test accuracy for malaria-attributable fever and on the RDT cost [3,40], the test threshold t and the tes.Om the previous study, at 3.7 for children and at 0.14 for adults [40]. The same estimates may reasonably apply to the alternative combination amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, as this was found as effective as ACT in the study area [42]. As far as safety is concerned, amodiaquine is the partner drug of one of the most widely used ACTs, and the combination, as well as sulfadoxinepyrimethamine alone, have been tested in several randomized controlled trials [42?5], while sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine has been extensively used as intermittent preventive treatment both in pregnancy and in infants, showing an excellent safety profile [46,47]. Harm expressed as mortality plus cost. If costs are considered, then all variables must be attributed a monetary value, including life (or the value of a death averted). Treatment harm will add to the cost of treatment for all (Tc), the attributed value to a life (Lc) lost because of treatment toxicity, while the harm caused by the untreated disease will involve the attributed value to a life lost due to disease mortality. By adding the new parameters, the following equation results: DT TczTmort ?Lc Dmort ?Lc ??Malaria Decision ThresholdFigure 4. maximal theoretical effect of tests: odds ratio. Legend: OR: log10odds ratio; LR: log10likelihood ratio. Log10positive and negative likelihood summed make the log10odds ratio, shown on a log10odds scale. The width between test-treatment threshold and decision threshold is determined by the negative likelihood ratio of the test. Mutatis mutandis, the distance between the test treatment and the decision threshold are given by the positive likelihood ratio. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058019.gFrom the same source as above [40], an average treatment cost of 1 J for children and 2 J for adults were obtained for ACT (arthemeter-lumefantrine), while the value of a death averted (for both adults and children) was made vary between J 525 and 3150 (corresponding to YLL values of 25 and 150 US , a proposed benchmark for a very cost-effective and a cost-effective health intervention, respectively) [2]. Costs are indicated in J as the local currency CFA has a fixed exchange rate with euro. The same conversion value with US as in the previous study [40] was maintained. The thresholds were then calculated with both the lower and the upper values. The estimated average adult cost of an alternative treatment with amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was of 0.14 J [48].The derivation of both formulas for test and test/treatment thresholds are provided in Methods S1.Test and Treatment DecisionsThe pre-test probability of malaria for a febrile patient of each age group and season, obtained from the same source, was then matched against the obtained test and test/treatment threshold. If the pre-test probability was below the test threshold, or above the test/treatment threshold, then the conclusion was that the test was not indicated.The Maximal Test CostThe “maximal test cost” is the test cost that virtually eliminates the test range, making the two thresholds coincide with the decision threshold. Any test cost equal or above the maximal test cost makes the test a non viable option. The formula and its derivation is provided in Methods S1.Estimate of the Test and Test/Treatment ThresholdEstimate based on the test accuracy. With the data previously obtained on test accuracy for malaria-attributable fever and on the RDT cost [3,40], the test threshold t and the tes.